Being new to IMAC, I am finding it very confusing that one judge can give you a score (say a 6.5) and the other judge a 0. I have seen this on a few occasions.
It seems to me that in order to receive a 0 you had to completely blow the maneuver or make so many errors in it along the way that you ended up with a 0. But how can that possibly jive with the higher score that the other judge gave.
On this particular maneuver it was part of my unknown and a relatively easy maneuver. Pull up vertical, 1/4 roll, hammerhead, 1/4 roll and exit opposite direction. Pretty straight forward. I agree with the 6.5 BUT a 0?
I also generally ask the judges when I land if I 0'ed anything and in this case no one answered me.
Well in looking at this situation and since this has happened to me more than once and has happened to other I have talked to, I don't believe this is an isolated situation. I could understand a score of 1 or 2 and a zero, but more that that from one judge and we should be looking at what is going on.
As I recall from years past in pattern, in order for you to get a 0 on a maneuver it had to be unanomous from all the judges. Granted that can bring up other problems but at least it would be agreed on that the maneuver deserved a 0.
Part of the other problem is that it is difficult if not impossible when you go to a contest to get your round scores or talk to the judges and find out WHY they 0'ed a maneuver. I can understand not wanting to get rid of the score sheets and giving them to the contestants every round, but how hard would it be for the score program to spit out the individual scores for contestants after every round? That way you might be able to talk to the judge that gave you the 0 to find out what they saw (or didn't) to give you a 0.

My thoughts and I'd like to see what others have to say.

Terry

Terry,
I can think of two situations that could cause that kind of score difference in a hammerhead. The first would be a small tailslide or backwards movement. The rulebook says that it must be definite to cause the maneuver to be zeroed and the judges could easily disagree over this.
The other is in a wingover or flyover. One judge could have said that it was 3 wingspans, thus a 3 point deduction and the other judge could have said it was 4 wingspans and therefore a zero.
There are a multitude of other situations that could result is a judge giving a zero and only that judge knows why he gave it. When I am judging, I always try to tell pilots why I gave them zeros and I'm happy to discuss it after the round if I can remember it. Also keep in mind that most judges look down to write scores and there is no telling what they missed during that time, not to mention the 1001 other things that can momentarily distract you when your judging.
James

Just to be clear on the point deductions for the hammerhead read the rule book for family 5.(8.5 i) It states that the deduction is 1 point for every 1/2 wingspan. Three full wingspans should be a deduction of 6 points. 4 wing spans is a zero.

I totally agree with Doc about the tail slide. One judge may see a clear tail slide before the turn; the other judge could have given the pilot the benefit of the doubt and scored the maneuver.

The judges probably didn’t have time to talk while judging the next pilot, so try to catch them after the round. I have found that most judges will offer an explanation of why they gave you a zero.

I've always looked at it this way. Most if not all of the people that I know in IMAC are very reluctant to give someone a zero and if I get a zero from one judge and a score from the other, I probably deserve the zero and consider the score a gift. On the whole, judges under deduct a lot more than they over deduct. In the end, it really doesn't matter, as long as a judge is consistent.
James

Thanks guys for the responses.
My goal in this thread was not to cry sour grapes about my scores in that particular maneuver. But rather bring to light a situation that I have seen repeating itself.
As to my particular maneuver, it wasn't a tail slide (although I do tend to take hammers to the point that all upline has stopped) nor was it a wing over.
But my point is that if judges are giving 0's they should have to justify that 0 to someone as a 0 is a very harsh score and should only be used when the maneuver meets ALL the criteria for a 0.
If James as you have pointed out, judges are reluctant to give 0's and give gifts, this is just as bad and that judge should be made aware of the error of his or her ways.
By having the judges have to agree on a zero, this would fix both these points, and further educate out judging.

Terry

Question 1..do you sit in the judges chair..or have you......... Question 2. did you ask the judge why the 6 or why the zero....I have found in the past it is quite easy to zero out manuvers via elements in manuvers...Using your example..how vertical was the upline..how was the centering of the element on the upline.where did the element on the upline start and finish...how well was the stall turn executed..was it winged over ..how many winspans..did it slide any..did it flop..what was the pendulum effect on the down line..on the downline was it tucked or bowed..how straight was the down line ..was the mid downline element centered..how was it executed...did it achieve wings level and when..was entry..all of these aspects have to be criticized in a mere 10 to 15 seconds...try it on an unlimited manuver where there are 4 elements on just about every manuver..A suggestion would be ..most of us fly at the same field over and over with the same friends that watch and judge us and become lazy in our assessment...go somewhere else and fly with others and see if they are seeing the same things that you see..I try to consult with my partner judge when I zero something but nowhere.that I have read says that this is a must..Sorry it happened to you but look at it a positive fashion ..It could possibly have been a double zero...Just my two peso.....pop

I'm new at judging here in the N.E. region and so I will only judge the Sportsman class until I get more experience. It is amazing to me that the judging in these events works as well as it does. You have the same small group of people judging each other throughout the year with all of their personal predjudices and opinions that are all a part of human nature. I fully agree, from what I see in our region that judges are reluctant to give zero's most of the time and usually consult with each other before their final desision on giving a zero. I think this is especially true in the lower classes. I also agree with Bruce in that, the best way to see how your doing, is to fly in a few events outside of your area where different judges will be evaluating your flying. Also, I think it's a great idea to attend at least one of the judging schools. You will learn a lot from that experience alone. Just my thoughts.

We are all humans sitting in the judges chair. We all see things others do not, we all do not see things others see. All you can do is be consistant in your judging and hope the guys judging you are doing the same. Like some one above said this happens all the time. In the middle of the maneuver I have said to my caller i just zeroed that one only to find I got a 6&7.

There are certain manoevers where it is very hard to judge if it is fudged or legit and the three biggies are stalls, spins and snaps. I have seen many instances where pilots have obviously ruddered out the hammer and given a zero and others where a big crosswind blows the plane sideways over three wing spans and given them a 5. Judging is very subjective and has to be done often in a split second so it is very easy to see where 1 judge can give a 6 and the other a 0. As has been mentioned as long as things are consistent that's what matters. Another thing I stress at our contest (the NOIC) is that judges try to confer with the pilots if there is time and explain why they zeroed but it is a time thing. If there are a lot of pilots, the judges have to move on or things will go on all day.
Best thing is to suck it up, try to get your problem areas fixed up (such as stalling into a crosswind) and enjoy the contest. Remember, most IMAC pilots (even Basic class) are probably the best pilots in their clubs and you only get better every time you compete!

Lee

Remember, most IMAC pilots (even Basic class) are probably the best pilots in their clubs and you only get better every time you compete!

Well said

Guys, I think we are getting to hung up on my maneuver which is not what I was trying to accomplish when starting this thread.
My point to all of this, is that there should be consistancy between the judges as to what determines that a score for a maneuver is a 0. And from what I have seen there isn't.
Has this to do with the level of understanding of the different judges and how to score the maneuvers.....obviously.
Bruce, to answer your questions, yes I have sat in the judges chair many times, it's just been a few years (to say the least). As far as your comment on I could have received two 0's, well that's the point to this discussion, I would have perfered it. It would show consistancy in the judging.
Again, forget about my particular maneuver and lets look at consistancy among judges. If this were an isolated instance, I probably wouldn't have brought it up.......but I don't think it is and it shows me that there may be a potential problem.
If the judges were required to agree on a score of 0, this could be easily achieved after the flight is over and before the next contestant starts their routine. There is time for the judges to confer on this and come to an agreement.

Terry

You know I once had a friend tell me a while back that if you are going to sweat the judging that much you will never enjoy the sport. As it has already been said, once the "bum" is in the chair the stuff goes by really fast. Even if there is time at the end of each sequence for the judges to confer they may still not agree with each other on what they saw.... then what?

The best thing I have seen an experienced judge do was in Tuscon at the Shootout. The judge had the scribe jot a quick note why the zero was given - math - flop - no stall, etc. Other than that leave the judges alone they are doing their best. Just try harder next time to be perfect in order to remove any doubt. Many have a hard time getting into the chair just because of this controversy.

It has happened to all of us and it certainly isn't new. I have heard this discussion since the early '80's.

Lighten up and enjoy.

Ted

I am new to IMAC, but not to competition. The one thing I see on all the forums about the subject of judging is that it is not perfect. I have so much respect for a judge that would take time out of the "fun" and help out his fellow flyers... it is an unselfish and very noble thing to do. I think that everyone gets away from who they are competing against in this sport as they are doing their best against the elements that arise everytime you put the plane up in the air. In your own words you did not execute the manuever well... a double zero would have been way worse like Pop said...

Dont let this scenerio bother you enough to take the fun out of the sport, it will drive you mad!

Posted By Terry on 04 Jul 2010 14:23
Being new to IMAC, I am finding it very confusing that one judge can give you a score (say a 6.5) and the other judge a 0. I have seen this on a few occasions.
It seems to me that in order to receive a 0 you had to completely blow the maneuver or make so many errors in it along the way that you ended up with a 0. But how can that possibly jive with the higher score that the other judge gave.
On this particular maneuver it was part of my unknown and a relatively easy maneuver. Pull up vertical, 1/4 roll, hammerhead, 1/4 roll and exit opposite direction. Pretty straight forward. I agree with the 6.5 BUT a 0?
I also generally ask the judges when I land if I 0'ed anything and in this case no one answered me.
Well in looking at this situation and since this has happened to me more than once and has happened to other I have talked to, I don't believe this is an isolated situation. I could understand a score of 1 or 2 and a zero, but more that that from one judge and we should be looking at what is going on.
As I recall from years past in pattern, in order for you to get a 0 on a maneuver it had to be unanomous from all the judges. Granted that can bring up other problems but at least it would be agreed on that the maneuver deserved a 0.
Part of the other problem is that it is difficult if not impossible when you go to a contest to get your round scores or talk to the judges and find out WHY they 0'ed a maneuver. I can understand not wanting to get rid of the score sheets and giving them to the contestants every round, but how hard would it be for the score program to spit out the individual scores for contestants after every round? That way you might be able to talk to the judge that gave you the 0 to find out what they saw (or didn't) to give you a 0.

My thoughts and I'd like to see what others have to say.

Terry

Terry,

There are a few things that I would like to address in your comments

First off this is IMAC, not pattern so the judging is is different.

There is no requirement for the judges to tell the pilot anything, most every judge does it to help the pilot. Scoring between two different judges will almost never be the same as each judge sees things or may not see things that the other judge may or may not have. There is not always time for the judges to talk to a pilot. Most contests in my region are now requiring pilots to be in the air and ready as soon as the previous pilot lands. This gives no time for a discussion by the judges and when there is time, it is usually because there was a problem with the plane or pilot. It's also not fair to ask the other pilot to wait while the judges go over scores. I have asked the pilot orbiting around if he/she has the fuel, not enough fuel and I will not answer questions. Is that the pilots problem for not carrying enough fuel, yes and no, yes because the pilot should have some spare fuel and no because he is only required to carry enough to do the sequence twice without landing

To have the judges be required to confer on a zero could easily limit the zero's being handed out when they are deserved or just as bad, slow the contest down

As far as the score program spitting out round scores on a per pilot basis, take the time yourself to walk over to the score keeper and ask the person to print you out your scores. I have done this for pilots when asked for them but I do not do it as a rule of thumb and I will do it only if I have the time. A scorekeeper can be just as busy if not more busy as the CD of the contest and it may never end all weekend. At a recent 25 person contest I was the score keeper and I can tell you from the time the first sheets came to me until about 15 minutes past the last pilot, I barely had time to eat, let alone print raw scores for pilots

As a judge, I've had pilots ask me if they got zero's and I try to answer and answer correctly but there have been times I have said no and I had actually did give them a zero

May I make a suggestion, please learn exactly what it takes to run a contest. It will answer a lot of your questions

AMEN JAMES..I RAN THE FLIGHT LINE AND JUDGED DURING THE DELAND CONTEST AND DID NOT HAVE TIME TO GRAB MY BUTT..PUT 3 ROUNDS IN WITH 34 PILOTS AND STARTED AT 1030
AND FINISHED AT 530...EVERYONE WANTS TO FLY...MANY ARE CALLED TO DUTY BUT FEW VOLUNTEER....THE SYSTEM IS NOT PERFECT BUT WE KEEP GETTING BETTER ALL THE TIME.....POPS

Side Note: It was only a few years ago when the judges (IMAC judges) were required to agree on zero's. The body (that's you) RD's and BOD's voted to change that rule where as judges don't have to agree anymore. There were problems with the "agree" rule also. Speaking as a 14 year IMAC member who's flown under both rules, the "don't have to agree on zero's" rule is an improvement to judging.

Hope this helps,

Dan Baker